BackgroundAdvances in the care of burn injuries have resulted from the efforts of regional patient-based specialist teams at burn care centers.ObjectivesWe conducted this study to assess the four-year epidemiology of burn injuries in Rasht, Iran.Materials and MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, medical records of 2274 burn patients, treated at Velayat hospital from January 2007 to December 2010 in Rasht, Iran, were assessed. Age, sex, level of education, occupation, severity and degree of burn, burn surface area, burn cause and outcome of patients were evaluated.ResultsIn our study the overall mortality rate was 8.7%; 65.7% of patients were men and 34.3% were women. Mean age of patients was 31.47 ± 22.67 years. Mean Total Burn Surface Area (TBSA) was 15.24 ± 18.4. Lowest TBSA was 0.5% and highest TBSA was 100%. Significant associations were observed between age (P = 0.0001), place of residence (P = 0.004), level of education (P = 0.0001), unemployment (P = 0.0001), marital status (P = 0.021), causes of burn (P = 0.0001), TBSA (P = 0.0001) and mortality rate. In our study, no significant difference was observed between age and sex (P = 0.071).ConclusionsDue to high prevalence of burn injuries in Iran, increasing the level of awareness of the society as well as adhering to safety procedures both at home and workplace is recommended via implementing effective national safety policies.

Although the recipient site in burn wounds is dressed with universally accepted materials, the ideal management of split-thickness skin donor sites remains controversial. The aim of our study is to compare two methods of wound dressing in donor sites of split-thickness skin graft in patients undergoing burn wound reconstructive surgery. Forty-two consecutive patients with second-and thirddegree burns with a total body surface area between 20 and 40 % were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial conducted in Motahari Burn Hospital in Tehran, Iran. In each patient, two anatomic areas with similar features were randomly selected as intervention and control donor sites. The intervention site was dressed with amniotic membrane, whereas the control site was treated with Vaselineimpregnated gauze. Wounds were examined daily by expert surgeons to measure the clinical outcomes including duration of healing, severity of pain, and infection rate. The

No abstract

No abstract